Direct Measurement of Double-Layer, van der Waals, and Polymer Depletion Attraction Forces between Supported Cationic Bilayers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interactions of supported cationic surfactant bilayers and the effects of nonadsorbing cationic polyelectrolytes on these interactions were studied using the surface forces apparatus (SFA) technique. Bilayers of the cationic surfactant di(tallow ethyl ester) dimethyl ammonium chloride (DEEDMAC) were deposited on mica surfaces using the Langmuir-Blodgett technique, and the interactions between the bilayers were measured in various salt, nonionic polymer (PEG), and cationic polyelectrolyte solutions at different polymer molecular weights and concentrations. The forces between the bilayers in CaCl(2) solution are purely repulsive and follow the DLVO theory quantitatively down to bilayer separations of ∼2 nm. Addition of nonadsorbing polymer or polyelectrolyte has a number of effects on the interactions including the induction of a depletion-attraction between the bilayers and screening of the double-layer repulsion due to the added ions in the solution from the polyelectrolyte. The experimental results are shown to agree well with standard theories of depletion attraction and double-layer screening associated with dissolved polyelectrolyte. We also observed significant time and rate effects on measuring the equilibrium bilayer-bilayer interactions possibly due to the unexpectedly long times (>1 min) associated with the charge regulation of the bilayer surfaces. Implications for the interactions and stability of vesicle dispersions, i.e., of free rather than supported bilayers, in polymer solutions are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".